What happens when you talk about salaries at Google • Hacker News Board

Re: What happens when you talk about salaries at Google

#221

Post by learnstats2 » Tue, Jul 21, 2015, 2:09 PM UTC

chasing wrote: post #171

This is not journalism. Do not treat it as such. Molly McHugh and Wired need to reach out to this woman and ask a few questions. They need to reach out to Google and ask a few questions. Otherwise, this information is just a shade better than useless. There's a lot of detail missing in these tweets. There's a lot of handwaving where the audience is essentially invited to fill in the blanks with whatever stereotypes -…

This comment is derailing. The precise definition of journalism is totally irrelevant.

Erica Joy has shared an important story that we should listen to.

Re: What happens when you talk about salaries at Google

#222

Post by balabaster » Tue, Jul 21, 2015, 2:10 PM UTC

codingdave wrote: post #162

mhluongo wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> tl;dr she got exactly what you would expect when you're intentionally stirring shit up at any company. I'm not sure what she expected. What? Sharing salary information is a protected employee activity, and retaliation is illegal.. so maybe she expected there wouldn't be retaliation?

That is probably exactly what she expected. And if this were a small group politely sharing with each, there likely would not be retaliation. But once you make it "a thing", and are impacting the culture of an organization, then you have stepped into politics. The reactions at that point are going to be exaggerated, and not necessarily relevant to the original topic. I don't like politics, and stories like this are e…

I've worked for all manner of companies from the smallest 2 person shops to the largest multi-billion dollar oil magnates and one thing is common across all of them, politics. Even at the Whitehouse one rule is common - keep your friends close and your enemies closer. Its all about who owes who what favours and what you can do to further their agenda. If they don't owe you a favour or you can't further their agenda, you're meaningless (and thus worthless) to them. If you can provide them with software that increases their margins by half a billion dollars a year or give them a leg up the ladder of their career, they'll pay you pretty much whatever that's worth to them.

Politics might appear less evident in smaller companies, because you're more likely intimately familiar with the people at the top. In a larger corporate environment where you really don't know everyone intimately, your perspective of the politics are compounded because you're not necessarily part of the inner circle. The road to the top is all politics though. If you want to get there, you have to know how to play your hand and visibly provide what those at the top need to further their own political agenda.

Re: What happens when you talk about salaries at Google

#223

Post by woah » Tue, Jul 21, 2015, 2:12 PM UTC

codingdave wrote: post #162

mhluongo wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> tl;dr she got exactly what you would expect when you're intentionally stirring shit up at any company. I'm not sure what she expected. What? Sharing salary information is a protected employee activity, and retaliation is illegal.. so maybe she expected there wouldn't be retaliation?

That is probably exactly what she expected. And if this were a small group politely sharing with each, there likely would not be retaliation. But once you make it "a thing", and are impacting the culture of an organization, then you have stepped into politics. The reactions at that point are going to be exaggerated, and not necessarily relevant to the original topic. I don't like politics, and stories like this are e…

Again, another argument that "she should have known". No. If Google retaliated against her for sharing salary information, this is illegal, and they need to be punished. A bunch of hand waving about "politics" and "the way things are" is completely meaningless and irrelevant, and smacks of some sort of mild corporate Stockholm syndrome.

Re: What happens when you talk about salaries at Google

#224

Post by lsniddy » Tue, Jul 21, 2015, 2:12 PM UTC

fixxer wrote: post #217

billyhoffman wrote: post #208

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Reposting tweets is not valid journalism. For that matter, including tweets from random people in reaction to a news event is also not valid journalism either. I don't care what muffycat1974 on Twitter has to say about the Iran nuclear deal, unless muffycat1974 is the Secretary of State.

By that same token, who cares what "billyhoffman" has to say?

those of us reading the top comments on a forum?

Re: What happens when you talk about salaries at Google

#225

Post by billyhoffman » Tue, Jul 21, 2015, 2:13 PM UTC

fixxer wrote: post #217

billyhoffman wrote: post #208

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Reposting tweets is not valid journalism. For that matter, including tweets from random people in reaction to a news event is also not valid journalism either. I don't care what muffycat1974 on Twitter has to say about the Iran nuclear deal, unless muffycat1974 is the Secretary of State.

By that same token, who cares what "billyhoffman" has to say?

You probably shouldn't, because I'm often wrong and frequently drunk :-)

In seriousness though, when a news story is breaking, I'd like the news website to provide meaningful commentary from educated and informed people who can contribute to the understanding of the event. I don't care about the lay persons opinion when I'm reading a New York Times story about a world event. I want to hear for someone knowledgeable.

A discussion site like HN is a completely different context with different expectations. I'm coming here for everyone's thoughts.

Re: What happens when you talk about salaries at Google

#226

Post by jaawn » Tue, Jul 21, 2015, 2:13 PM UTC

murbard2 wrote: post #194

jaawn wrote: post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If a manager and company have any justification for pay differences that are not due to protected classes, then they have nothing to fear. If they do pay people differently because of protected classes, they may run into trouble, but I think that's okay. If most companies were transparent, employees would be a lot more knowledgeable about what leads to more pay. I think we would see more negotiation and engagement an…

Of course they have nothing to fear, because these prosecutions never serve a political agenda, the judicial system has displayed a commitment to integrity, people don't assume the accused are automatically guilty, and trials are so cost efficient that people only settle when they've done something wrong.

Even political agendas and sensationalist trials need some leg to stand on to be successful. If you hire honestly and set pay honestly and fairly, with recorded justifications, it is unlikely that your company would suffer any negative repercussions of pay transparency. However, this doesn't mean "absolutely no company anywhere will run into legal trouble due to this"

There are always exceptions, but they are just that: exceptions. The existence of an exception or outlier does not disprove what generally holds true for everyone else.

Re: What happens when you talk about salaries at Google

#227

Post by q3k » Tue, Jul 21, 2015, 2:13 PM UTC

balabaster wrote: post #125

mhluongo wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> tl;dr she got exactly what you would expect when you're intentionally stirring shit up at any company. I'm not sure what she expected. What? Sharing salary information is a protected employee activity, and retaliation is illegal.. so maybe she expected there wouldn't be retaliation?

The fact that she's a woman is neither here nor there... on the surface where it can be seen. Behind the scenes however, you have politics. When you piss people off that are in power, they find ways to make your life uncomfortable - that goes whether you're male or female. To expect there will be no retaliation for pissing off higher ups would be incredibly naive. Even if what you are doing (strictly speaking) is leg…

So, are we all now just blaming it on the victim, “she should have known better, what else did she expect”?

Why is that okay in a Employee / Corporation setting? Is that also okay in a rape victim / rapist setting? Where do we draw the line now?

Re: What happens when you talk about salaries at Google

#228

Post by Bartweiss » Tue, Jul 21, 2015, 2:14 PM UTC

chasing wrote: post #171

This is not journalism. Do not treat it as such. Molly McHugh and Wired need to reach out to this woman and ask a few questions. They need to reach out to Google and ask a few questions. Otherwise, this information is just a shade better than useless. There's a lot of detail missing in these tweets. There's a lot of handwaving where the audience is essentially invited to fill in the blanks with whatever stereotypes -…

I have no problem with Erica Joy's approach here. She told a fairly comprehensive story about a concern she had with Google, and ended it with a fairly unassailable moral (doodles do not an 'ethical' company make).

Wired, on the other hand, stooped to about the journalistic level of Gawker with this. If you're going to run social media content as an article, that deserves background and confirmation. If you're going to implicitly accuse an organization of racism, sexism, and violating labor laws, that demands proper followup and investigation.

Wired had a real opportunity here to do serious journalism here and squandered it.

Re: What happens when you talk about salaries at Google

#229

Post by chasing » Tue, Jul 21, 2015, 2:14 PM UTC

fixxer wrote: post #213

chasing wrote: post #171

This is not journalism. Do not treat it as such. Molly McHugh and Wired need to reach out to this woman and ask a few questions. They need to reach out to Google and ask a few questions. Otherwise, this information is just a shade better than useless. There's a lot of detail missing in these tweets. There's a lot of handwaving where the audience is essentially invited to fill in the blanks with whatever stereotypes -…

How do you define journalism? Obviously, this isn't an article, but it is information and I found it entertaining. True, only a single point of view... shall we call it Gonzo? If you compiled all those tweets into a paragraph, it wouldn't require substantial edits to generate smooth prose.

Journalism is about getting to the truth. That involves doing a bit of legwork to assess the veracity of what someone is saying.

Re: What happens when you talk about salaries at Google

#230

Post by woah » Tue, Jul 21, 2015, 2:14 PM UTC

deadmik3 wrote: post #164

smcgivern wrote: post #152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Perhaps you could clarify what you think: > exactly what you would expect when you're intentionally stirring shit up at any company is? From this reply, it appears that you think Google did nothing wrong - regardless of whether she was 'stirring shit up' or not.

I don't think they did do anything wrong against her. She didn't get her peer bonuses for starting this spreadsheet?

You don't think they retaliated, or you don't think that it would be wrong for them to retaliate?